A comparative study on communication structures of Chinese journals in the social sciences

[Zhou, Ping]

Dear Enrique,

It's impossible and unnecessary to analyze every journal covered by the CSSCI, let alone the journal you mentioned is not covered by the CSSCI.

Regards,

Ping Zhou

Expertisecentrum O&O Monitoring, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China
Dekenstraat 2, bus 3536
B 3000 LEUVEN, Belgium
Tel. +32 16/32.57.50
Fax +32 16/ 32.57.99
Ping.Zhou at econ.kuleuven.be

From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Enrique Wulff
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 9:06 AM
To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] A comparative study on communication structures of Chinese journals in the social sciences

Curiously enough this article does not analyze such resources like the 'Journal of dialectics of nature. ISSN 1000-0763' or institutions as known as the 'school of marxism and philosophy' at the South China university of technology.
Otherwise there is a lot of anti-Obama speech on the Web, and his attempt to normalize the relations between the United States and Russia, so the good learning environment in social sciences enjoyed there is obviated as a rule of thumb.

Enrique Wulff

At 15:47 22/02/2010, you wrote:

nist ideology - it was the same in the days of the Soviet Union - Marxist/Leninism is presumed to be the only philosophy/methodology needed to explain social life and for a social scientist to explore different avenues was positively dangerous. With the collapse of communism in Russia, social scientists there and in the former dependencies are now exploring Western social philosophy and, to a certain extent, anything Marxist is considered suspect - a complete reversal of the previous situation.

Given the tight control of society in China, I imagine that looking beyond Marxism for social explanation would also be considered suspect.

Tom Wilson

On 22 February 2010 14:33, Zhou, Ping < Ping.Zhou at econ.kuleuven.be<mailto:Ping.Zhou at econ.kuleuven.be>> wrote:
Dear David,

The "stagnation" is concluded based on two types of comparison: comparison with natural and life sciences domestically and the specialization comparison between Chinese and international communities.

Domestic comparison shows that China's world share of publications in the social sciences lags dramatically behind that in the natural and life sciences (see Figure 1 of the paper).

International comparison shows that China is less specialized than its international counterparts. We argue that specialization links to maturity of a discipline; less specialization may lead to slower progress.

The full text of the paper can be retrieved at:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.3590

With kind regards,

Ping Zhou


From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [ mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Wojick
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 12:57 PM
To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] A comparative study on communication structures of Chinese journals in the social sciences


What do you mean by "stagnation" and how are you measuring it? This seems like an odd conclusion to draw from a citation analysis.

David
On Feb 22, 2010, Zhou, Ping < Ping.Zhou at ECON.KULEUVEN.BE<mailto:Ping.Zhou at ECON.KULEUVEN.BE>> wrote:
Title: A comparative study on communication structures of Chinese journals in the social sciences
Source: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, forthcoming
Authors: Ping Zhou, Xinning Su, Loet Leydesdorff
Abstract: We argue that the communication structures in the Chinese social sciences have not yet been sufficiently reformed. Citation patterns among Chinese domestic journals in three subject areas-political science and marxism, library and information science, and economics-are compared with their counterparts internationally. Like their colleagues in the natural and life sciences, Chinese scholars in the social sciences provide fewer references to journal publications than their international counterparts; like their international colleagues, social scientists provide fewer references than natural sciences. The resulting citation networks, therefore, are sparse. Nevertheless, the citation structures clearly suggest that the Chinese social sciences are far less specialized in terms of disciplinary delineations than their international counterparts. Marxism studies are more established than political science in China. In terms of the impact of the Chinese political system o!
n academic fields, disciplines closely related to the political system are less specialized than those weakly related. In the discussion section, we explore reasons that may cause the current stagnation and provide policy recommendations.



--
----------------------------------------------------------
Professor Tom Wilson, PhD, PhD (h.c.),
-----------------------------------------------------------
Publisher and Editor in Chief: Information Research: an international electronic journal
Website - http://InformationR.net/ir/<http://informationr.net/ir/>
Blog - http://info-research.blogspot.com/
Photoblog - http://tomwilson.shutterchance.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: wilsontd at gmail.com<mailto:wilsontd at gmail.com>
-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20100224/c7b84ca2/attachment.html>